Phone: (03) 9563 4688

Email: office@aubreypaton.com.au

Address: 17D Chester Street, Oakleigh VIC 3166

Latest Accounting News
Hot Issues
Touch Payroll (STP)
‘Calm before the storm’: Government proposes 12-month SG amnesty
Government intensifies cash payments crackdown - Kelly O'Dwyer
Passive investment companies tax rate still 30%
Cryptocurrency audits tipped to increase this EOFY
Australia by numbers – Update
$2.4m lost to tax scams, ACCC reports
No GST on digital currency
Federal Budget 2018 - Overview
Your Budget
4 components of our 2018 Federal Budget
Resources to help understand and implement Single Touch Payroll (STP)
New rules capture SMSFs trading big with cryptocurrency
New passive income test for lower corporate tax rate
Tools to help you manage your financial position are available on our site.
‘A simple mistake can attract our attention’: ATO reminder about FBT slips-ups
Australia by numbers – Update
Beware residency rules if moving overseas
Meaningful tax reform in high demand
Working holidaymakers and tax returns
Single Touch Payroll – 1 April 2018 Action
Property investors on notice after ATO spots false claims
ATO issues update on cryptocurrency compliance traps
Australia's vital statistics
Accountants spy elder abuse spike as mortgage stress sets in
Tax office releases fresh guidance on SMSFs
Labor's tax plans could favour the rich, analysis shows
FBT Reminder – Odometer Reading
Our website is really our digital office.
‘Substantiation will be a key focus’: ATO drums in tax time 2018 hit list
Articles archive
Quarter 1 January - March 2018
Quarter 4 October - December 2017
Quarter 3 July - September 2017
Quarter 2 April - June 2017
Quarter 1 January - March 2017
Quarter 4 October - December 2016
Quarter 3 July - September 2016
Quarter 2 April - June 2016
Quarter 1 January - March 2016
Quarter 4 October - December 2015
Quarter 3 July - September 2015
Quarter 2 April - June 2015
Quarter 1 January - March 2015
Quarter 4 October - December 2014
Quarter 3 July - September 2014
Quarter 2 April - June 2014
Quarter 1 January - March 2014
Quarter 4 October - December 2013
Quarter 3 July - September 2013
Quarter 2 April - June 2013
Quarter 1 January - March 2013
Quarter 4 October - December 2012
Quarter 3 July - September 2012
Quarter 2 April - June 2012
Quarter 1 January - March 2012
Quarter 4 October - December 2011
Quarter 3 July - September 2011
Quarter 2 April - June 2011
Quarter 1 January - March 2011
Quarter 4 October - December 2010
Quarter 3 July - September 2010
Quarter 2 April - June 2010
Quarter 1 January - March 2010
Quarter 4 October - December 2009
Quarter 3 July - September 2009
Quarter 2 April - June 2009
Quarter 1 January - March 2009
Quarter 4 October - December 2008
Quarter 3 July - September 2008
Quarter 2 April - June 2008
Quarter 1 January - March 2008
Quarter 4 October - December 2007
Quarter 2 April - June 2007
Quarter 1 January - March 2007
Quarter 2 April - June 2006
Quarter 1 January - March 2006
Quarter 4 October - December 2005
Quarter 3 July - September 2005
Quarter 3 of 2008
Articles

George & John, Newsletter and Information

Prescribed Private Funds
Work Related Deductions – Personal Care Services
Fringe Benefits Tax – Meal Cards

Deductibility of Interest to Acquire Units in Hybrid Trust

Migration Skills
Depreciation of Computer Software
Investment Property Deductions Disallowed
FBT and Laptop/Portable Computers
Tips When Selling A Property

July Newsletter

Apportionment of Home Office Expenses Affirmed
Investment Property Deductions Disallowed
Apportionment of Home Office Expenses Affirmed
In a recent decision, the AAT upheld the Commissioner's decision that a deduction for home office expenses should be apportioned on a floor area basis.

A taxpayer operated its business activities in an office in one of the front rooms of its directors' main residence, and used this room exclusively for business purposes. For the years ended 30 June 2003, 2004 and 2005, the taxpayer had claimed 50% of the property related expenses in its income tax return.

The taxpayer held a 50% interest in the property and the remaining 50% was held by both directors as tenants in common. The directors, along with their children, used the property as their main residence.

The taxpayer argued that since it had a 50% ownership interest in the property, it was entitled to 50% of the deductions. It argued that its use of the property did not fall within the category of a ‘home office', which would limit the availability of deductions to a use basis.

 

 

 

 

 

 



10th-July-2008